Between Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo who is the Apple of console gaming?

[Timbuktu]

Nintendo or Sony.
But really imo it's Sony. Apple actually modeled a lot of what they do today engineering wise because of Sony back in the 90s. It's well documented the affinity Steve Jobs had for Sony. So much so jobs was even thinking of actually having macOS on the vaio PCs

Click to shrink...

well yeah, I guess Sony had that premium consumer electronics space until Apple took it from them starting with the iPod and then Samsung eclipsed them as well. I wonder why Sony struggles so much outside of PlayStation and the cameras sector still.

Nintendo is similar in the sense of their vertical integration between the games and hardware design. And they both had massive up and downs. Their brands are similar in that way, but Nintendo as a company is tiny in comparison and relative to their cultural footprint.

 

[Henrar]

Can't be Sony. They have no understanding of why maintaining an ecosystem is useful. PS3 games? Pfft. PS2 games? Who wants to play that crap? PS1 games? Naw man...

Click to shrink...

I mean, that's actually pretty similar to what Apple does. Try playing 32 bit games on your new Mac, for example.

Or any software that was made during the PowerPC days.

 

[degauss]

The PS5 console is huge and ugly. It's the total opposite of Apple's minimalist design philosophy.

None of the big three are anything like Apple tbh.

Click to shrink...

It's far from opposite. I have the PS5 (digital, in standing orientation) standing next to my iMac here and it looks quite similar, certainly within the same ballpark - matt light grey and shiny black. I should take a picture of them side by side. It's not quite as refined as an Apple design, but these two objects do not look 'opposite', I look at them together every day since working from home.

I would say the PS5 design is decent, not from every angle, but a far cry from the prosaic 'gamer asthetic' memes. It's a pretty minimal light grey slab.

Also the size memes, sure it's big, but far from huge, it's barely bigger than the PS3 fat, and every pic only uses the stand to make it look taller and never highlights it's lack of depth. It's a few cm taller than the PS3 fat without the stand, apart from that dimension it's roughly the same. It's way shallower than the PS4 Pro, and I know this because my media unit is shallow and the PS5 fits it better than the Pro. Also XSX won't even fit due it it's height in side orientation. It's size has been exaggerated. It's not even in the same universe of size as your average desktop PC. Or if you want to go the Apple route again, it's barely bigger than 2 mac minis (and probably has to output 4x the heat as those weak little computers).

What other 11+TF device is smaller? The Series X, but do you want to tape Series X and PS5 vents up and throw them in the bath to figure out displacement? I think it would be close.

 

[Foxnull]

You mean paying deluxe prices for average tech? Sounds like Nintendo for me.

 

[Shiny Man]

Definitely Nintendo. You can see that by their overpriced products.

 

[Grapezard]

Every console has Apple elements, but Switch-era Nintendo has been Apple-ing it up big time. Especially with the ads and especially especially with the business practices.

 

[MrCarter]

Nintendo or Sony.
But really imo it's Sony. Apple actually modeled a lot of what they do today engineering wise because of Sony back in the 90s. It's well documented the affinity Steve Jobs had for Sony. So much so jobs was even thinking of actually having macOS on the vaio PCs

Click to shrink...

Agreed. It's clear they took a lot of inspiration from Sony when it comes to marketing and they became a huge success due to it. Sony does have that modern, zeitgeist edge (that people associate with Apple) that Nintendo simply cannot match. Both are, however, good at catering to their specific audience.

 

[pswii60]

It's far from opposite. I have the PS5 (digital, in standing orientation) standing next to my iMac here and it looks quite similar, certainly within the same ballpark - matt light grey and shiny black. I should take a picture of them side by side. It's not quite as refined as an Apple design, but these two objects do not look 'opposite', I look at them together every day since working from home.

I would say the PS5 design is decent, not from every angle, but a far cry from the prosaic 'gamer asthetic' memes. It's a pretty minimal light grey slab.

Also the size memes, sure it's big, but far from huge, it's barely bigger than the PS3 fat, and every pic only uses the stand to make it look taller and never highlights it's lack of depth. It's a few cm taller than the PS3 fat without the stand, apart from that dimension it's roughly the same. It's way shallower than the PS4 Pro, and I know this because my media unit is shallower than the PS5 fits it better than the Pro. Also XSX won't even fit due it it's height in side orientation. It's size has been exaggerated. It's not even in the same universe of size as your average desktop PC. Or if you want to go the Apple route again, it's barely bigger than 2 mac minis (and probably has to output 4x the heat as those weak little computers).

What other 11+TF device is smaller? The Series X, but do you want to tape Series X and PS5 vents up and throw them in the bath to figure out displacement? I think it would be close.

Click to shrink...

I've got my PS5 Digital in horizontal orientation, because that way it can be a little more hidden under my TV, and yes it's absolutely huge and ugly. It's screaming for attention (in a bad way) with that design where it would be better placed in a teenager's bedroom rather than my living room which I'm trying to keep minimalist. It's just completely un-Apple. I will say that it looks way better than my original PS5 Disc Edition though.

I'm not sure why you're bringing XSX in to this? I said none of them are like Apple. But seeing as you are mentioning Xbox, the beauty of the XSX is that at 30x30cm it hides completely behind a LG C9 OLED at either the side of the stand, where you have perfect clearance for it.

As for "what other 11+TF device is smaller?" (I think you mean 10+TF). But isn't that the point?! Apple wouldn't have made a 11TF+ games console. They'd go for something more efficient, lower power, ARM based, much smaller, less power consumption. I'd guess that's where Nintendo gets closer.

 

[Deleted member 18324]

Apple make the best phones, tablets and laptops. Sony make the best consoles and games.

Click to shrink...

This didn't take long to devolve into mindlessly declaring preferences.

The truth is that all console manufacturers are broadly Apple-like in that they are attempting to sell largely vertically-integrated proprietary consumer electronics. What everyone here is doing is taking their preference either for or against Apple products and using it as a cudgel to bash or praise their chosen targets as required, to the point where you have absurd claims that something as ugly as the PS5 is comparable to Apple product design (it isn't) just to make a comparison fit.

 

[Stoney Mason]

Weird thread premise and even weirder responses that turn into stealth bragging posts.

 

[Sylmaron]

Nintendo as in overpriced.

 

[degauss]

ly. It's screaming for attention (in a bad way) with that design where it would be better placed in a teenager's bedroom rather than my living room which I'm trying to keep minimalist.

Click to shrink...

Yeah that's what i'm disagreeing with mainly, looks fairly minimal to me and not screaming for attention. That and it not really being that huge.

 

[Deleted member 1476]

Nintendo, without a shadow of a doubt.

No one else is so far up their asses and more anti-consumer than them from the big three.

 

[dep9000]

umm nintendo. not even close. neither Sony nor MS can do what Nintendo does.

 

[Alek]

I don't think Nintendo really fit. Because Apple have a very user centered approach to their design, whereas Nintendo do not. It feels as though while Nintendo make pleasant games, their systems rarely match the needs of their users. They're rare focus on accessibility, and they often ship features that mismatch the users expectations (e.g. their online friend system, or party chat solutions).

 

[Scottoest]

I mean, Apple aren't even really the Apple they used to be when Job was in charge.

If you mean that version of Apple that constantly innovated and had a rabid fanbase, then Nintendo. In terms of current Apple, which is more about consistent design language and iterative refinement, I think Microsoft are similar with the Xbox - they've had a consistent design language for several years, and the UI has seen constant refinement, rather than starting over.

In terms of market success, I guess Sony? Or would you I guess give that to Nintendo right now too, considering the Switch sales?

In reality the question itself is kinda nonsense. Which is the PlayStation of Xboxes?

 

[Euler007]

Depends how you look at it. Apple sold the highest spec products at the highest price, that's not Nintendo. As far as customer loyalty, Nintendo for sure. Actually I'm sure there's a fair bit of overlap, the house that is apple only (TV, tables phones) has a good chance of being Nintendo only.

 

[Windrunner]

Nintendo do not have the ecosystem to be compared to Apple. They're also bad at online and almost have complete contempt for accessibility concerns.

 

[Bait02]

Every tech company strives to be like Apple and to be able to sustain their premium prices.
Now the relation to Nintendo is only appliable to extent they are able to sustain higher margins (on sotfware and hardware) than the rest of the industry.
In relation to how they propose themselves to the market, they are very different.
Nintendo tries to reach the widest audience as possible catering to the lower end market.
Apple only makes premium products and tries to make consumers spend more on a given product category than they would otherwise (leveraging propriery technology).
In this sense, I think Nvidia is operating more similarly to Apple in the gaming space, expecially lately.

 

[Celine]

Here the Apple of console gaming:

 

[Deleted member 43552]

Hopefully none of them.

Apple has always been more marketing than substance and could never quite justify the price tags their proprietary hardware tends to carry. I'd rather not see a $1499 PS5 that's slowed to uselessness by firmware updates in 2 years.

The three console makers all tend to have more consumer friendly business models. Of the three Sony is the most consistent with their hardware/software output though. Only the Vita was ever truly a failure and that's one product since what...1995?

Click to shrink...

I respect your opinion but I think this is a bad take. Let's look at iPhones for instance. Just to name a few things:
- Their custom silicon is consistently rated as the fastest in the industry.
- Typically industry leading battery life
- Amazing support for hardware up to and beyond 5 years.
- Fantastic integration between devices (if you're in the ecosystem). For example, opening my iPhone unlocks my Apple Watch, etc.

 

[Celine]

Nintendo has a premium pricing model but it's products are far from prestige, but they do like to be on their own like Apple. I just don't find their products to be consumer oriented, Nintendo makes products for Nintendo, not what the consumer wants.

Click to shrink...

That's the funniest thing I read on ERA in a while.

 

[SquirrelSaysNuts]

Apple is the Apple of console gaming.

 

[jon bones]

Hopefully none of them.

Apple has always been more marketing than substance and could never quite justify the price tags their proprietary hardware tends to carry. I'd rather not see a $1499 PS5 that's slowed to uselessness by firmware updates in 2 years.

The three console makers all tend to have more consumer friendly business models. Of the three Sony is the most consistent with their hardware/software output though. Only the Vita was ever truly a failure and that's one product since what...1995?

Click to shrink...

this is wild

 

[Iron Eddie]

That's the funniest thing I read on ERA in a while.

Click to shrink...

Now imagine making an iPhone with a display of 720p where you can only text each other with no voice communication and still charge a premium because it comes preloaded with Super Mario Run. Plus a Nintendo Browser that blocks all adult material.

Other than that, then yes, they are very much like Apple.

 

[Okii]

Nintendo, not even close.

Extreme walled garden approach to software
Expensive hardware and software that doesn't drop in price
"Prestigious" company image
Very brand image focused, less about internals, more about externals and overall design.

 

[Celine]

Now imagine Steve Jobs making a purple iPhone with a display of 720p where you can only text each other with no voice communication and still charge a premium because it comes preloaded with Super Mario Run. Plus a Nintendo Browser that blocks all adult material.

Click to shrink...

Now image talking about a console that, month in month out, was the best selling one in US for two straight years and dare to say that it's not wanted by consumers.

 

[Iron Eddie]

Now image talking about a console that, month in month out, was the best selling one in US for two straight years and dare to say that it's not wanted by consumers.

Click to shrink...

Ok you got me, because they sell lots then they are exactly like Apple.

 

[BriGuy]

Analogue.

A $500 NES whose body is made of a single piece of aluminum? They've got the same "beautiful but tough to justify" thing going for them.

 

[Kaiken]

I'd give that crown to Nintendo. Just wish they'd sell a Pro model already.

 

[K Samedi]

Nintendo has a premium pricing model but it's products are far from prestige, but they do like to be on their own like Apple. I just don't find their products to be consumer oriented, Nintendo makes products for Nintendo, not what the consumer wants.

Answer, Sony is most like Apple but Nintendo acts like they are.

Click to shrink...

How does Nintendo not make products what consumers want? This is not in any way supported by facts. Their software sells millions on a single hardware platforms. They own the most valueble IP in the industry. You're just looking at it the wrong way. You can look at hardware power and limitations, but what you actually need to do is look at what part of their products make them successful.

In the end though I don't think they are anyway related to Apple. They're a toy company first and foremost. They try to surprise everybody all the time.

 

[Celine]

Ok you got me, because they sell lots then they are exactly like Apple.

Click to shrink...

I never said Nintendo is exactly like Apple.
I just pointed out that what you've written is simply illogical.

What you might have hinted off, which I would agree with, is that Nintendo values being different and believe that bringing (desirable) changes will benefit their bottom line.
Therefore Nintendo have, time and time again, introduced new concepts with the goal to surprise consumers (sometime it worked, some other times it didn't).
They don't just cater to what consumers know they want today but also sometime they aims for what consumers might want tomorrow (but don't know yet).

 

[Iron Eddie]

How does Nintendo not make products what consumers want? This is not in any way supported by facts. Their software sells millions on a single hardware platforms. They own the most valueble IP in the industry. You're just looking at it the wrong way. You can look at hardware power and limitations, but what you actually need to do is look at what part of their products make them successful.

In the end though I don't think they are anyway related to Apple. They're a toy company first and foremost. They try to surprise everybody all the time.

Click to shrink...

They make products that suit their own game development, not what third party hope for. Are you really trying to say there is no desire for a more powerful Nintendo console? Are you also suggesting the online service they have served us for many years is what consumers wanted?

I never said Nintendo is exactly like Apple.
I just pointed out that what you've written is simply illogical.

What you might have hinted off, which I would agree with, is that Nintendo values being different and believe that bringing (desirable) changes will benefit their bottom line.
So Nintendo have, time and time again, introduced new concepts with the goal to surprise consumers (sometime it worked, some other times it didn't).
They don't just cater to what consumers know they want today but also sometime they aims for what consumers might want tomorrow (but don't know yet).

Click to shrink...

It works for them, I have not doubted that at all. I think it's great they do something different but it is by no means in comparison to how Apple designs products. Apple may charge a premium but they by no means fall behind in what comparable products are offering. They have always been known to have good displays and good cameras built into their phones. They have a huge catalog of music artist support. They simply take something and make it easy for the consumer. By comparison how are Friends Codes meant to have an easy online experience?

 

[TooBusyLookinGud]

None of them.

 

[OCD Guy]

None of them are.

Not one produces hardware with as much "want appeal". The build quality on most Apple products is great. Have you seen a PS5 in person? Feels so cheap.

Also most Apple software is optimised to the max, have you seen the stability of the PS5 U.I?

Nintendo don't compare either, most of their products feel so cheap, do you remember the Wii U controller? I'm surprised some people have said Nintendo hardware is premium. The Switch is probably their most premium bit of hardware and even that feels cheap, although far better build than previous hardware.

Nintendo also have the most basic features missing in their O.S.

Also Microsoft, have you seen their O.S on Xbox, it's far from simplified and swift like an Apple O.S.

I went with a Pixel phone for Stadia launch (I know, but. I thought playing games on a phone would be enjoyable) and man I'm regretting it. Android still feels janky, and that's with a 90hz display which I've permantely enabled in developer options. Scrolling a web page still doesn't feel as nice as on an iPhone.

 

[Iron Eddie]

None of them are.

Not one produces hardware with as much "want appeal". The build quality on most Apple products is great. Have you seen a PS5 in person? Feels so cheap.

Also most Apple software is optimised to the max, have you seen the stability of the PS5 U.I?

Nintendo don't compare either, most of their products feel so cheap, do you remember the Wii U controller?

Nintendo also have the most basic features missing in their O.S.

Also Microsoft, have you seen their O.S on Xbox, it's far from simplified and swift like an Apple O.S.

I went with a Pixel phone for Stadia launch (I know, but. I thought playing games on a phone would be enjoyable) and man I'm regretting it. Android still feels janky, and that's with a 90hz display which I've permantely enabled in developer options. Scrolling a web page still doesn't feel as nice as on an iPhone.

Click to shrink...

This is true. People buy Apple products to have an Apple experience. From the craftsmanship of their design/products to the overall consumer experience that goes from Apple product to Apple product. Once you're in their ecosystem the consumer they want to stay there. Microsoft is trying to do that with their backwards compatibility approach but they have so many problem just with the Windows Store.

I don't feel any of them have a premium product all around that is consumer friendly.

 

[BringBackSonics]

Nintendo:

- Doing their own thing
- Making a lot of money doing it
- Microsoft puts out software on their platform from time to time
- People who don't regularly use their hardware complain about specs when it really doesn't matter in the way they think it does

Click to shrink...

It's this.

 

[Marano]

Nintendo:

- Doing their own thing
- Making a lot of money doing it
- Microsoft puts out software on their platform from time to time
- People who don't regularly use their hardware complain about specs when it really doesn't matter in the way they think it does

Click to shrink...

From time to time? Which IP has MS put on switch outside of ori? Minecraft is running on tablets anyway so I would say that is an exception.

 

[JaggiBaggi]

Most people will say Nintendo. It's actually Sony, but don't tell them.

 

[kitler53]

let's see. when i think of "apple" i think.

- over priced hardware to specs
- low quality software
- an insane amount of marketing to compensate

yep, apple is the apple of video games.

 

[Derachi]

From time to time? Which IP has MS put on switch outside of ori? Minecraft is running on tablets anyway so I would say that is an exception.

Click to shrink...

Cuphead, Ori, Outer Worlds, Doom Eternal, and I think Minecraft absolutely counts.

Also "from time to time" literally just means "sometimes but not regularly" which I think is being met here.

 

[Marano]

Cuphead, Ori, Outer Worlds, Doom Eternal, and I think Minecraft absolutely counts.

Also "from time to time" literally just means "sometimes but not regularly" which I think is being met here.

Click to shrink...

Ah cuphead is not MS's IP, that is also on ps4 and the devs probably had a deal in the pre gamepass days (afaik it is not even on gamepass, so MS cant control where it goes past their initial deal probably), outer worlds is a private division game and was in development before MS acquired obsidian, simmilar situation to wasteland 3, psychonauts was multiplatform commited before MS acquired double fine, doom eternal was already commited to switch before MS announce yhe zenimax acquisition (and they still dont own zenimax for day to day purposes).

Minecraft definitely counts but it was already a multiplat and was always going to be a multiplat as the huge moneymaker it is everywhere.

Ori is truly the only one nobody expected to show up on switch (IIRC it is moons passion project on switch).

 

[tzare]

Nintendo.

 

[MysticGon]

It use to be Sony. Making their own chips, storage cards and disc formats. They really were on the cutting edge.

 

[Blayde]

Hopefully none of them.

Apple has always been more marketing than substance and could never quite justify the price tags their proprietary hardware tends to carry. I'd rather not see a $1499 PS5 that's slowed to uselessness by firmware updates in 2 years.

The three console makers all tend to have more consumer friendly business models. Of the three Sony is the most consistent with their hardware/software output though. Only the Vita was ever truly a failure and that's one product since what...1995?

Click to shrink...

lol not even 10 posts in and we are already at the apple hate bull shit posts. You aren't even correct.




But yeah, if any of them are like apple its nintendo. Nintendo does whatever they want and so does apple. Both provide extremely high quality products even though they sometimes lack features competitors have.

 

[Empyrean Cocytus]

None of them. Apple is in a weird place when it comes to tech. They live off of being simple to use and trendy. I'd call Sony and Microsoft trendy, but not simple to use. I'd call Nintendo simple to use, but not trendy.

 

[MBABuddha]

Nintendo has been trying to be Apple for the past 30 years. Anyone remember when the color variations of the N64 almost exactly matched the color variants of the first iMacs? Or just looking at the Wii?

 

[JoRu]

None are particularly close, but I guess Nintendo's the closest if you had to pick. Sony anno 2005-2006 was a bit like a poorly executed Apple, though.

 

[Rex Dart: Eskimo Spy]

Nintendo, no question.
Emphasis on brand and design over actual horsepower, check.
Persistent "premium" pricing, heavy gouging on accessories and peripherals, check.
Reliably tonedeaf and anti-consumer, check.

 

[bry]

Nintendo.
I do think tho when you look at the OS in terms of its yearly updates and how its the same across the systems it reminds me of the smartphone model tho lol.
Which i like personally